Reflect

Activation: Passive (Active, Incidental, Out of Turn)

Ranked: Yes

Force Talent. When the character suffers a hit from a Ranged (Light), Ranged (Heavy), or Gunnery combat check, and after damage is calculated (but before soak is applied, so immediately after step 3 of Perform a Combat Check, page 148), if the character is wielding a lightsaber, he may take the Reflect incidental.

OR

Parry

Activation: Passive (Active, Incidental, Out of Turn)

Ranked: Yes

Force Talent. When the character suffers a hit from a Brawl, Melee, or Lightsaber combat check, and after damage is calculated (but before soak is applied, so immediately after step 3 of Perform a Combat Check, page 148), if the character is wielding a Lightsaber, he may take the Parry incidental.

They may reduce the total successes or advantages by a number equal to or less than their level in the Lightsaber skill.

They suffer 2 strain, +1 strain per success or advantage negated, -1 strain per rank in Parry/Reflect to a minimum of 2 strain.

In plain language a character may reduce the number of uncanceled Success or Advantage up to their Lightsaber skill. They then suffer strain equal to the number of symbols negated +2, -1 per rank in Parry/Reflect, with 2 strain being the minimum.

Example: Stormtrooper squad Alpha takes a shot against a character and hits, having rolled 2 successes and 3 advantage. The character now has the option of activating Reflect, as they have their Lightsaber ignited and ready. The character has a Lightsaber skill of 4 and 2 ranks in Reflect, they have the option of reducing up to 4 successes/advantages. The character decided to reduce both successes rolled against them, and will not be hit by the attack having removed all attack successes. The character may also remove up to 2 advantage, 4(Lightsaber skill) minus 2 (successes they have cancelled already). The character decided to remove 2 advantage, leaving a total of 1.

Stormtrooper squad Alpha has now missed their target, and generated 1 advantage. The character now must suffer 4 strain. 2(base number) + 4(the total successes +advantage canceled) -2 (their ranks in the Reflect talent) for a total of 4 voluntary strain.

Arguments for using this method.

• More Accurate Narrative -The current talent essentially acts as soak and does not adequately represent, IMO, the ability to Parry/Reflect represented in the films and Clone Wars. While I can acknowledge the narrative explanation of soak = deflected away, I do not feel it is accurately represented in the rules as written for the current version of Parry/Reflect.

• Lightsaber Skill Matters - I suggest that a character with a higher Lightsaber skill should be better at Parry/Deflect. The current incarnation of Parry/Reflect doesn't take the Lightsaber skill into account. Two Jedi standing side by side, 1 is a Shii-Cho Knight with high Brawn the other is a Soresu Defender with high Intellect and using Soresu Technique. Both have a 5 in Lightsaber skill, both have 2 ranks in Parry. The Shii-Cho Knight has a huge advantage over the Defender since neither Intellect nor Lightsaber skill is utilized in defending, only in attacking. The Shii-Cho attacks with the same skill, but has a much higher soak value. I suggest this is not reflected in the films or Clone Wars cannon, nor is it interesting or exciting from a narrative standpoint. Both the above characters should be able to stand side by side and Parry/Deflect away attacks from low level attackers with the same success rate. Neither one should be seriously threatened from multiple small attacks. Currently only the Shii-Cho can stand his ground and exchange witty banter with the enemy.

• Variable Stress - The worse the people are at shooting your character, the easier it is to deflect their attacks. The better they are, think Jango Fett vs Obi Wan Episode 2, or Cad Bane vs whoever the hell he feels like in Clone Wars, the more likely they are to get past Parry/Deflect. The more successes that need to be cancelled directly translates into stress for the character. The current version is a flat rate of stress, 1 success on the hit is dealt with exactly the same as 9 successes. You spend your 3 strain and reduce the damage.

• Hard Cap – The proposed system for Parry/Reflect also introduces a hard cap for both stress and total success/advantage reduction. This opens up slots in the Lightsaber focused specializations to be used for more interesting/thematic Talents. The current system of Parry/Reflect does not have a hard cap, and is more open for min/maxing if someone takes multiple Lightsaber Specializations. For example a Shii-Cho Knight takes Makashi Duelist as a second Specialization, they can reasonably get 7-8 levels in Parry adding that to their already high Brawn. This is only 1 example, and I do acknowledge that they have 0 ranks in Reflect. The main point I’m attempting to convey is that the proposed system puts more of an emphasis on leveling up the Lightsaber skill rather than hunting through Specializations looking for cheap/easy Parry/Reflect talents to take. I feel this provides more incentive to create diverse and interesting characters.

I would also suggest that every Lightsaber Specialization in F&D should have at least 1 level in both Parry and Reflect. At the very least it should be something all of them are familiar with. It is the first thing Luke learns after all, it can’t be all that hard can it?

Arguments against using this method.

• Not as simple or easy to explain. The current Parry/Reflect system is very easy to use and does provide a form of defense against the specified attacks.

• The current version has already been play-tested a significant amount and re-working this reasonably key Talent is beyond the scope of the Beta test. I can understand if the designers are at a level where they feel the current system has been tested and found robust enough.

• Not enough/Too much strain taken. In the extreme example of a character having 5 Lightsaber skill and 1 level of Parry, who then reduces success/advantage by 5 they would take 6 strain. While I admit this seems like a large amount of strain to take from 1 talent, I would remind people that this is voluntary and they get to see the dice results first and may then decide if to use the Talent. Also, presumably if the proposed system is accepted then there will be more playtesting to determine the exact level of strain that would be appropriate.

Thank you in advance for your constructive criticisms, concerns and thoughts. I would also like to say that I have read many other's suggestions on Parry/Reflect and would simply like to provide this as yet another excellent suggestion for the developers to consider.

Makes to many die rolls and slows the game down. Not KISS.

First I agree that essentially I'd like to see parry add failure and threat symbols to the pool.

I actually think it's more simple than soak before soak. One soak that avoids breach and pierce and another that does not is not simple--not hard either but not simple. Getting hit 5 times by a saber for 2 or 4 points each is not true to the source. Much easier to say it missed and move on on to the one that counts. And strain is a limited resource which I don't think is considered enough.

I think what you have is a good idea but the strain (edit: I accidentally said soak at first) part might be a step too complicated.

We've tried a few things:

1. Activate deflect/parry and spend up to 2+ranks strain to add failures/threat to the pool rolled. Very simple way to do it.

2. Activate deflect/parry and spend up to 2+ranks strain to cancel extra hits (autofire, linked, secondary weapon) and then after that, if you still can, add failures to the pool rolled.

3. Commit a number of Force dice up to ranks in parry/reflect for 3 strain per turn (or one with supreme). Add that many force dice to all attack check pools. Use results to add threat or failure to the roll. This tends to lessen the use of Force powers when being defensive/dueling much like we see in the source.

Bringing LS skill into it is a pretty cool idea, though.

Makes to many die rolls and slows the game down. Not KISS.

Reflect

Activation: Passive (Active, Incidental, Out of Turn)

Ranked: Yes

Force Talent. When the character suffers a hit from a Ranged (Light), Ranged (Heavy), or Gunnery combat check, and after damage is calculated (but before soak is applied, so immediately after step 3 of Perform a Combat Check, page 148), if the character is wielding a lightsaber, he may take the Reflect incidental.

OR

Parry

Activation: Passive (Active, Incidental, Out of Turn)

Ranked: Yes

Force Talent. When the character suffers a hit from a Brawl, Melee, or Lightsaber combat check, and after damage is calculated (but before soak is applied, so immediately after step 3 of Perform a Combat Check, page 148), if the character is wielding a Lightsaber, he may take the Parry incidental.

They may reduce the total successes or advantages by a number equal to or less than their level in the Lightsaber skill.

They suffer 2 strain, +1 strain per success or advantage negated, -1 strain per rank in Parry/Reflect to a minimum of 2 strain.

In plain language a character may reduce the number of uncanceled Success or Threat up to their Lightsaber skill. They then suffer strain equal to the number of symbols negated +2, -1 per rank in Parry/Reflect, with 2 strain being the minimum.

Simplification: Instead of "reducing Success/Advantage," why not "add Failure/Threat" to the enemy's check? Then put it up a bit earlier in the combat check procedure.

Nitpicking: activation would be Active (Incidental, Out of Turn). Also, I'm assuming by "Threat" in the last paragraph you mean "Advantage." Again, it's nitpicky, but trying to be helpful. Nice to have a clean ruleset.

My main problems: this is 1) far too powerful, and 2) makes an unbeatable combo with the Disruptive Strike talent, which adds Failure to an opponent's next check. 3) It is also very complicated, which you address later. Lastly, 4) it steps on the toes of Supreme Parry/Reflect, which already reduces Strain suffered when performing the talent.

The big issue for me is that this it makes it really easy to completely negate attacks, turning successful hits into unsuccessful ones. And this is just not in keeping with the feel of the game. 2 strain to fully negate a successful attack is too good.

And considering what one can do with Disruptive Strike, it makes the Shien Expert the "god specialization." Also it kind of steps on the toes of Disruptive Strike, being potentially much more powerful than this 25 XP talent by means of costing only a maneuver's worth of strain and an incidental to cancel out the successes of an already-rolled check, whereas Disruptive Strike is a unique action that one commits to without knowing the actual benefit.

Also on the whole "too good" level, being able to cancel out Advantage is really just over the top. Makes this talent even more of a "must have" for its utility.

Question: What would the proposed change to Supreme Parry/Reflect be in this ruleset?

Arguments for using this method.

• More Accurate Narrative -The current talent essentially acts as soak and does not adequately represent, IMO, the ability to Parry/Reflect represented in the films and Clone Wars. While I can acknowledge the narrative explanation of soak = deflected away, I do not feel it is accurately represented in the rules as written for the current version of Parry/Reflect.

I would say "more simulationist" rather than "more accurate." I do not think is sort of thing is necessary. You can be cinematically accurate and have the game mechanics support your narrative & creativity, rather than relying on game mechanics that do "X thing" which can only mean "Y thing" in the narrative.

What's more, "Wounds" don't have to be "hits from a blaster bolt" (just like Soak doesn't have to be "blaster immunity rating"). Wounds can just be the physiological wear and tear of battle. So again, I would encourage less simulationist thinking because it can really mess with the mojo of this game.

If it works at a given table that's one thing, but in the games I've played in and with the system as a whole taken into consideration, less simulation in favor of narration is preferable. Not to say that we're just playing make-believe, but rather that a single game mechanic can have umpteen different narrative resolutions. So it helps not to pigeonhole a solution.

• Lightsaber Skill Matters - I suggest that a character with a higher Lightsaber skill should be better at Parry/Deflect. The current incarnation of Parry/Reflect doesn't take the Lightsaber skill into account. Two Jedi standing side by side, 1 is a Shii-Cho Knight with high Brawn the other is a Soresu Defender with high Intellect and using Soresu Technique. Both have a 5 in Lightsaber skill, both have 2 ranks in Parry. The Shii-Cho Knight has a huge advantage over the Defender since neither Intellect nor Lightsaber skill is utilized in defending, only in attacking. The Shii-Cho attacks with the same skill, but has a much higher soak value. I suggest this is not reflected in the films or Clone Wars cannon, nor is it interesting or exciting from a narrative standpoint. Both the above characters should be able to stand side by side and Parry/Deflect away attacks from low level attackers with the same success rate. Neither one should be seriously threatened from multiple small attacks. Currently only the Shii-Cho can stand his ground and exchange witty banter with the enemy.

I find this argument to be too hung up on names.

First, "Parry" and "Reflect" don't have to be the only way that a Jedi-type character "deflects" a blaster bolt or "blocks" another lightsaber.Further, when a character uses either talent, the player isn't necessarily beholden to describe their character deflecting or blocking with their lightsaber. It could be a dodge or a feint, or "I use the Force to move a small piece of debris into the path of the blaster bolt, deflecting it."

Second, it's true, Parry and Reflect don't take your raw "Lightsaber skill" ranks into account, but don't the talents themselves represent some form of training with the lightsaber?? Your skill rank isn't, and shouldn't be, the only determiner of your total "skill level." I use the term "skill level" to be more in-universe conceptual than the game's "skill" mechanic*. The same is true for the Defensive Training talent. Since it requires a weapon being wielded, it implies some "skill" with the weapon (again, not necessarily related to "Skill Ranks").

FWIW, the talents Feint and Defensive Circle take the Lightsaber skill into account in an indirect way...and I kind of like how they do.

If anything, I would rather see damage reduction rather than Success negation . Consider Deadly Accuracy and Pressure Point. These talents add damage, not Success, according to skill ranks. The inverse would be more appropriate than what the OP is suggesting.

Suggestion to amend the house rule: What if we were to take he original talent and, instead of the 2 + ranks in the talent of damage reduction, we make it weapon skill ranks + talent ranks of damage reduction?

• Variable Stress - The worse the people are at shooting your character, the easier it is to deflect their attacks. The better they are, think Jango Fett vs Obi Wan Episode 2, or Cad Bane vs whoever the hell he feels like in Clone Wars, the more likely they are to get past Parry/Deflect. The more successes that need to be cancelled directly translates into stress for the character. The current version is a flat rate of stress, 1 success on the hit is dealt with exactly the same as 9 successes. You spend your 3 strain and reduce the damage.

The problem here: the variable amount of strain suffered gives players (and the GM, in the case of NPCs) too many options, which, in my experience, almost invariably slows down gameplay.

• Hard Cap – The proposed system for Parry/Reflect also introduces a hard cap for both stress and total success/advantage reduction. This opens up slots in the Lightsaber focused specializations to be used for more interesting/thematic Talents. The current system of Parry/Reflect does not have a hard cap, and is more open for min/maxing if someone takes multiple Lightsaber Specializations. For example a Shii-Cho Knight takes Makashi Duelist as a second Specialization, they can reasonably get 7-8 levels in Parry adding that to their already high Brawn. This is only 1 example, and I do acknowledge that they have 0 ranks in Reflect. The main point I’m attempting to convey is that the proposed system puts more of an emphasis on leveling up the Lightsaber skill rather than hunting through Specializations looking for cheap/easy Parry/Reflect talents to take. I feel this provides more incentive to create diverse and interesting characters.

What you've got, on the other hand, is IMO a "must grab" talent which promotes lack of diversity.

I would also suggest that every Lightsaber Specialization in F&D should have at least 1 level in both Parry and Reflect. At the very least it should be something all of them are familiar with. It is the first thing Luke learns after all, it can’t be all that hard can it?

Who's to say that Luke didn't select Shien Expert as a specialization? 5 XP reflect talent right there.

Also, I understand that Luke is one of the very few canon examples we have of Force users in this era, but that does not mean that his case is normative for all Force users in this game. He was following a specific path, as must we all. And that path was determined partly by himself and partly by his instructor.

• The current version has already been play-tested a significant amount and re-working this reasonably key Talent is beyond the scope of the Beta test. I can understand if the designers are at a level where they feel the current system has been tested and found robust enough.

• Not enough/Too much strain taken. In the extreme example of a character having 5 Lightsaber skill and 1 level of Parry, who then reduces success/advantage by 5 they would take 6 strain. While I admit this seems like a large amount of strain to take from 1 talent, I would remind people that this is voluntary and they get to see the dice results first and may then decide if to use the Talent. Also, presumably if the proposed system is accepted then there will be more playtesting to determine the exact level of strain that would be appropriate.

Yes, it's voluntary and they do get to see the dice results beforehand, but this was true of the original talent.

I'm not a fan of the highly variable amount of strain suffered. And again, of course, this doesn't take the Supreme versions of the talent into consideration, since already reduce strain and only by 2 AND only when the character hasn't made an combat checks.

*as an aside, in this system, having a single rank in a skill is like having high school education in that field. And 2 ranks is like a college education. 5 ranks means that you're the best in the **** galaxy. So the scope of the skill ranks is not the fiddly +1s to the d20 rolls, but rather much broader and more encompassing. It means more than mere "skillfulness," but it also doesn't have to be the sole determiner of a character's "skillfulness."

Personally I think that one's opinion of the RAW Deflect/Parry mechanics boils down to how effective they think Reflect and Parry should be. From there it's a matter of getting mechanics right (or sticking with the weaker option they have). Not the other way around with people talking about how long rounds are, what a wound is, and how many shots a check represents and skirting it.

I happen to think that a Jedi trained with a lightsaber should be able to stand back and take fire pretty much indefinitely while others do the ranged fire to hold off the attackers or achieve the objective. That's what I see in the source. "Focus your fire...on the Jedi" should always have that dramatic pause. Not "Take down the Jedi and then..."

Instead what we have allows them to take 1 or 3 strain strain, AND still probably take wounds and crits, AND even then only be able to do that for a few rounds before the strain is gone AND only against certain attacks and weapons AND after they spent XP to get the talent.

And in a duel I'd just rather see fewer hits and the ones that do land count for a lot just like in the source. Instead what we have is a system that whittles away like a LS is a club and making up why the LS hit wasn't really a LS hit.

And both favor using Force Powers tremendously instead of ever dueling. I'd like to see Force Powers harder to use when dueling or reflecting maybe with Force Dice commitment (maybe even instead of strain).

I'd be happy to see this discussion based on source as much as anything. Personally I think it's not game breaking to allow a Jedi to say attacks missed on move on and that can be very simple and quick to do mechanically.

I'm satisfied with the rules as written. I might change the numbers a bit if I had a choice, but not the mechanics. I generally frown on anything that adds more math, or mechanics.

Regarding what usgrandprix says

-I think base stats of a lightsaber have to be boosted while the number of mods decreased.

-Parry and reflect talents have to soak a bit more (either increase the base soak gained from 2 to 3+ or the amount of soak gained per rank to 2+. Reduce the amount of strain it costs to activate to 2.

-Improved parry / reflect triggered with 2 disadvantages instead of 3.

-A new talent Defensive Training style but that instead gives Deflect X to the lightsaber will be nice.

-Supreme versions reduce the strain cost to 1, period.

my take on it.

@ Daeglan, Usgrandprix and Split Light thanks for the replies and keeping it classy!

@awayputurwpn Thanks for the nitpicking, taken as intended to be constructive.

Main problems

1) far too powerful. Possibly, I fully understand that it may be too powerful, but that is a subjective issue for the Developers to nail down. You could tweak it with strain taken or exactly where the Talents fall in the Specialization trees. But for sure something to test.

2) Combo with Disruptive Strike. As I read Disruptive Strike, it would essentially mean that that character is negating the person targeted. So neither character is getting to do much at all, since DS is their Action for the round. Not sure exactly how much stronger this version is compared to current incarnation. Still something to keep an eye on for sure, good thoughts.

3) Very complicated. I’m of the opinion that since it is usually the PCs who are going to have to deal with this talent it isn’t overly complex for them to deal with. Certainly not more complicated than some of the force abilities given to them in the same book. However, again it comes down to personal taste in complexity and if the Devs feel it fits the complexity level of other Talents in the game.

4)Supreme Parry/Reflect would likely have to be changed I agree. But I felt that was putting the horse before the cart. It is possible there might not be a need for Supreme levels, which would open up more Talents for something a bit more diverse or characterful.

Lightsaber skill matters – I agree with your interpretation of the way combat should be narrative and inventive in the use of Parry/Reflect and other Talents. Though I would say that Reflect is pretty iconic from the movies/Clone Wars. There is a reason this Talent was saved for force users with Lightsabers.

Variable amount of strain suffered slows down the game – Entirely possible, too many levers to pull may end up not being worth the additional flexibility for the Talent.

Luke – Great points, I probably shouldn't have used him as an example. Stupid Luke, he even ends up sounding whiny in my examples!

Thanks for all your input!

@Usgrandprix – Thanks for the support. I’m a big fan, as we all are I’m sure, of the source material as well. So far I feel that FFG has done an AMAZING job at creating a RPG that fits the setting. I know that Force & Destiny is going to be the hardest book to balance and make the force users feel accurate.

I think the above suggestion for the Parry/Reflect Talent does mirror the source material somewhat better. But as I’m sure everyone knows we all have our own opinions on what is “good” and should be kept, and what is “bad” and should be overlooked *cough* midichlorians *cough*.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are meant to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Yep I appreciate the constructive talk from all here.

Especially about such an iconic ability.

And I agree it's a very good system. I've really enjoyed running it.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are mesnt to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Then wounds was a poor choice of a word.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are mesnt to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Then wounds was a poor choice of a word.

Not really. It just is not what you think it is. Most likely wounds are very minor injuries. Minor bruises, scrapes. etc.

Something like a shot(stimpack) makes them go away. That to me says they are not something one would need stitches to fix. Or basically they are a very minor injury. But the crit chart as you go up on it does get into the realm of real injuries like losing a hand.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are mesnt to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Then wounds was a poor choice of a word.

Agreed, they could have called Strain "Mental Strain" and Wounds "Physical Strain" or something. But as the system plays, Wounds aren't serious injury.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are mesnt to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Then wounds was a poor choice of a word.

I agree with the others here...I think some people tend to be a bit too narrow with the concept of "wounds." There are so many different ways of describing physical damage to a character (along with strain, disoriented, stunned, immobilized, knockdown, critical injuries, etc) that wounds are just a mechincal tool to be used in the greater narrative, with other things considered.

One thing i think people tend not to get I think is. Wounds I don't think are mesnt to represent actual hits. I think that is what crits are supposed represent. For example when you run out of wounds you get critted as well as go unconscious.

Then wounds was a poor choice of a word.

Not really. It just is not what you think it is. Most likely wounds are very minor injuries. Minor bruises, scrapes. etc.

Well, English is not my mother tongue but I don't think in the Anglo-Saxon world kids go running to their moms when they bruise a knee from a fall yelling "mom I am wounded! moooom I am wounded!"

In this game Strain is a sort of combined mental+physical fatigue.

Critical Injures represent some serious damage to your body that can kill you.

Wounds...I don't know, it seems to be a kind of a non-lethal easy to recover physical damage.

Makes to many die rolls and slows the game down. Not KISS.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

Combat takes long enough as is, and adding more rolls will only slow things down. It's not a deal-breaker if there's only a single PC with said talents, but when there's a chance the entire group could have them, then it becomes a serious issue. Particularly as one of the things this game has been praised for is that combats tend not to bog down the way they do in a number of other RPGs, with D&D and Pathfinder being common targets of such complaints, especially where spellcasters are involved.

Makes to many die rolls and slows the game down. Not KISS.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

Combat takes long enough as is, and adding more rolls will only slow things down. It's not a deal-breaker if there's only a single PC with said talents, but when there's a chance the entire group could have them, then it becomes a serious issue. Particularly as one of the things this game has been praised for is that combats tend not to bog down the way they do in a number of other RPGs, with D&D and Pathfinder being common targets of such complaints, especially where spellcasters are involved.